> I am saying that you can likely encapsulate a boat-load more pay-load in a small image, than if youre attempting to send blobs, timesequence

What? Why do you believe this?

From an information theory perspective, you’re talking nonsense.

You do not know steganography.

Try a wiki

Steganography does not increase the information density of a communication medium. It only uses that medium in a different way.

You need to revisit information theory and the physical and data-link layers of networking.

Why is it more likely that an image can store more information than just encoding the information directly in some format like binary? You have the added overhead of the actual image itself, now you have to transmit compress(bits(image) + bits(message)) when you could just do compress(bits(message)).

Iamgine the embeddeded encodes?

So an stegano can give you image ..> code ..Def=code.. image.. infor, it may require more itereations... look into it.

Originally the topic was undersea exploration. There’s no need for steganography, the issue is signal strength, not obscuring communications. There isn’t an enemy to intercept these messages.

I didnt realize that - I was just trying to convey, that mayhaps ; If a secrete message would be sent via Sonar, an image encoding might be efficient, such that the blok of info one wishes to convey, might be a really long stream, as opposed to encoded into an image which would result in shorter sonic comms...